The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 30 - Nov. 5:
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Importer Tempo Global Resources filed a stipulation of dismissal on Nov. 6 in its case on President Donald Trump's expansion of Section 232 steel and aluminum duties onto "derivative" products, after the Supreme Court declined to hear another case challenging the same presidential action. The Court of International Trade stayed Tempo Global's case in August pending the high court's resolution of the separate Section 232 case, PrimeSource Building Products v. U.S. (see 2308080024). The Supreme Court rejected PrimeSource's request for review at the end of October, despite the company's claims that the case could allow the court to decide how separation-of-powers principles apply to statutory interpretations delegating vast legislative power to the executive branch (see 2310300020) (Tempo Global Resources v. United States, CIT # 20-00066).
Products imported by Cozy Comfort are "pullovers" or "sweatshirts" not "blankets" or "other garments," DOJ said in a Nov. 3 motion for judgment in a tariff classification case at the Court of International Trade (Cozy Comfort Company v. U.S., CIT # 22-00173).
The "true nature" of a case brought by Turkish exporter Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari (Erdemir) is to challenge the International Trade Commission's finding on non-negligiblity in the underlying antidumping duty investigation on hot-rolled steel from Turkey, despite Erdemir's insistance that the challenge is to the ITC's decision not to hold a reconsideration proceeding, a group of defendant-intervenors led by Cleveland-Cliffs said in their Nov. 3 reply at the Court of International Trade (Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari v. U.S. International Trade Commission, CIT # 22-00349).
The U.S. and importer Fanuc Robotics America have "reached an agreement in principle" on how to classify all but two models of robots at issue in the the importer's case at the Court of International Trade. Submitting a joint status report on Nov. 3, the parties said that the classification of the remaining two models is "taking the parties much longer than anticipated" due to the age of the models and the retirement of the national import specialist who "assisted with the review of the technical information" in the case (Fanuc Robotics America v. U.S., CIT # 12-00052).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 2 order granted petitioner Sierra Pacific Industries' notice of dismissal in a case involving the final results of the 2021 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on softwood lumber products from Canada. The case was filed in October and dismissed before a complaint was filed (Sierra Pacific Industries v. United States, CIT # 23-00207).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a text-only order granted a motion to extend time to file an opening brief from exporters Double Coin Holdings and China Manufacturers Alliance in a case involving a review of the antidumping duty order on off-the-road tires from China. The exporters now have until Nov. 28 to file the opening brief in a case whin ich the Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's decision to assign Double Coin the 105.31% China-wide dumping rate due to the company's failure to rebut the presumption of Chinese state control over its export activities (see 2307200020) (China Manufacturers Alliance v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2391).
The Court of International Trade stayed a customs case concerning importer Cambridge Isotope Laboratories' enriched ammonium sulfate isotope until Dec. 11, given that Cambridge is consulting with the relevant antidumping and countervailing duty petitioners for a "partial revocation of the AD/CVD Orders on Ammonium Sulfide from China." Cambridge filed suit to contest CBP's assessment of the AD/CVD on the imports (see 2308300052) (Cambridge Isotope Laboratories v. United States, CIT # 23-00080).